home

60 Minutes On Don Siegelman's Alleged Railroading By Rove

By Big Tent Democrat, Section Other Politics
Posted on Sun Feb 24, 2008 at 06:03:27 PM EST
Tags: (all tags)
Share This: Digg! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

By Big Tent Democrat

60 Minutes is about to run its segment on Karl Rove and his alleged actions against Democratic Alabama Governor Don Siegelman. Worth a watch

Also, this is an Open Thread as I look for TChris' piece on the Siegelman-Rove story. Here is TChris' piece on the Rove-Siegelman story.

< Outrageous Attack On Obama's Patriotism | Oscars Predictions >

  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


    • Display: Sort:
    60 Minutes On Don Siegelman's Alleged Railroading By Rove | 27 comments (27 topical)

    Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

    Good piece (none / 0) (#1)
    by standingup on Sun Feb 24, 2008 at 06:26:39 PM EST
    Now the question is whether the rest of the media will pick it up from here and carry it forward.  I really believe this calls for a special prosecutor.  The Bush administration has shown that it has no intention of respecting the authority of Congress to investigate and the court battle over subpoenas will likely take longer than Siegelman's prison sentence.  

    What is amazing (none / 0) (#3)
    by sara seattle on Sun Feb 24, 2008 at 06:48:28 PM EST
    is how little that has truly stuck to Rove after all this time.

    May that time finally be now!!

    Parent

    Policing is not the Media's Job. (none / 0) (#7)
    by aztrias on Sun Feb 24, 2008 at 07:17:06 PM EST
    We expect too much from the media.  

    Rove's railroad of the Gov must be investigated by the next administration.  


    Parent

    It was at one point (5.00 / 1) (#8)
    by Kathy on Sun Feb 24, 2008 at 07:26:35 PM EST
    Remember a little story about Watergate?

    Back when the media tried to do something other than sit on their hands and pray for a book deal.

    Parent

    The effing Congress got involved - this one hasn't (none / 0) (#13)
    by aztrias on Sun Feb 24, 2008 at 09:14:23 PM EST
    I watched Watergate and the hearings.

    Once the papers uncovered significant, suspicious behavior - well beyond where we are with the DOJ and USA - the effing Congress did something.

    We're past the point where investigative journalism has to uncover a smoking gun.  

    Parent

    I won't hold my breathe (none / 0) (#9)
    by standingup on Sun Feb 24, 2008 at 07:31:52 PM EST
    for the next administration to investigate either.  I will be watching tomorrow's White House press briefing to see if anyone asks any questions of Dana Perino.  That might be as good an indication of any to see if there is any interest from the press as a whole.  

    Parent
    I'll check out 60 Minutes (none / 0) (#2)
    by CognitiveDissonance on Sun Feb 24, 2008 at 06:36:05 PM EST
    Off Topic: Did you know that Booman Trib is attacking you for being fair to Hillary at Talk Left? I never go there, because the comments are as rancid as at DKos, but Taylor Marsh has a story up about it. Just thought I'd mention it in case you care. :-)

    Question for a TU (none / 0) (#4)
    by coigue on Sun Feb 24, 2008 at 06:51:53 PM EST
    Apparently I am now a TU...and my info page is telling me I now have dire responsibilities.

    I can read the hidden comments, so I suppose I probably am a TU. However, I don't have a zero button. How does one actually rate a trollish comment round these parts?

    SSSH! Its a secret (none / 0) (#5)
    by Molly Bloom on Sun Feb 24, 2008 at 07:09:16 PM EST
    The TU, troll rating etc. has been turned off. No-one troll rate anyone off here.

    Which is why we still have conservative trolls.

    Parent

    since when?I (none / 0) (#11)
    by coigue on Sun Feb 24, 2008 at 07:36:29 PM EST
    know you have used one in the past month 'cause I saw it in the HC.

    Parent
    You can rate all you want (none / 0) (#15)
    by Molly Bloom on Sun Feb 24, 2008 at 09:28:24 PM EST
    At TL Its more of an expression of approval/agreement or disapproval/disagreement.

    The ability to make others trusted or troll rated out here has been turned off. Look at the hidden comments. The most recent is 2-17-07. The earliest is 11-21-06. JimakaPPJ and Jarober would have been banished long ago if the Mojo were actually working.

    Parent

    OMG! I didn't see the 07-I (none / 0) (#16)
    by coigue on Sun Feb 24, 2008 at 09:46:49 PM EST
    assumed it was 08. OK. Thanks for the explanation. I was totally confused, because you see: I got a note in my "your info" that said I was now a trusted user with responsibilities to TR.

    LOL

    Parent

    You should be able (none / 0) (#6)
    by ding7777 on Sun Feb 24, 2008 at 07:16:43 PM EST
    to see
    Display:__   Sort: __    Rate? __  

    following each Psted Topic.  Change the Rate? to Yes
    then you should be able to rate each comment.

    Parent
    no I only have radio buttons (none / 0) (#10)
    by coigue on Sun Feb 24, 2008 at 07:35:19 PM EST


    Parent
    Where's Clinton's BTD? (none / 0) (#12)
    by AF on Sun Feb 24, 2008 at 08:22:59 PM EST
    It occurred to me that there are a number of Obama supporters like BTD (and Kevin Drum) who like Clinton a lot and aren't caught up in Obamania, but are for Obama because they think he's more electable and/or (potentially) more transformative.  In other words, their hearts are with Clinton but their minds are with Obama.

    Where are Clinton supporters whose hearts are with Obama? There were plenty of them in December (in fact I was one of them), but now I am hard-pressed to think of any.  Certainly not on this blog.  

    Given that the main arguments being made against Obama are his inexperience and vulnerability in the GE -- quintessentially head-based arguments -- shouldn't there be some folks who buy these arguments who don't already prefer Hillary in their gut?

    I'm not really a Clinton supporter (5.00 / 1) (#14)
    by spit on Sun Feb 24, 2008 at 09:25:05 PM EST
    though she got my very tepid vote, but I would love to support Obama. I've honestly been very impressed with his ability to draw out both youth and activists, and think that's something we've needed to happen for a long time. I've got no particular love for either Clinton, and I'd love to, uh, "turn the page" -- I think we genuinely need new blood, from the top on down.

    But I flat out can't currently support his unity thing. I think it's fundamentally the wrong approach for the left. I hate that he attacks Clinton's stuff from the right far too often (as with the health care flyer), and I think that a lot of the left is so desperate for a "transformative figure" that they've decided that he is one without being critical enough of his frankly pretty middle-of-the-road policy ideas and the way he expresses them. I fear he has campaigned with vague enough language that people are simply assuming whatever they'd like, and it's not comforting for me when he, say, uses language that makes it sound like school vouchers are worthy of consideration. It's even more discomforting to watch people who, say, despise school vouchers try to parse him into whatever they support.

    So I suppose my head is with Clinton, but my heart with Obama, in that sense. I don't really go into electability arguments for the most part, as I think too much depends on context that's hard to predict this far out.

    To be clear, I also am not opposed to the left making bargains over electability -- I find the gnashing of teeth now over Jim Webb to be pretty funny, because I knew exactly what we were getting and supported him anyway. I sent McNerney money, too, though I knew he wasn't going to stand up when we needed him to, because getting rid of Pombo was worth it. I am very left, but I'm willing to make some of those compromises when I have to. I have no problem with people who are unwilling to make those compromises -- so called "purists". But I have a real problem with all the folks who delude themselves about these things. One of the things that makes me very uncomfortable about Obama is that IMO he's been built into something he's simply not by a huge number of people on the left. I will feel a lot better if I think they understand that they're compromising, but at the moment they often seem willing to suspend reality to justify their support without that kind of acceptance. That worries me for the future, honestly, when all these people figure out that Obama is no lefty.

    Parent

    Obama is no lefty (none / 0) (#18)
    by Prabhata on Sun Feb 24, 2008 at 10:10:00 PM EST
    One has to look at the constant to figure out the pattern.  Those voters (the constant) who chose Bush because he sold himself as someone who would bring change to the WH, are now voting for Obama.  I can predict the future because Americans repeat the same routine.

    Parent
    Say it on dkos (none / 0) (#20)
    by spit on Sun Feb 24, 2008 at 10:20:38 PM EST
    they'll all tell you why he's absolutely right and progressive, even though he apparently wasn't back in 2005.

    And it's not just the blogs, unfortunately. I'm basically a socialist, and I know other socialists. I can count on one hand the ones I know that don't buy it, lock stock barrel. Another extremely left friend and I actually had to carefully come out as unimpressed with Obama a few days ago, carefully trying not to stomp each other's feelings. We were both relieved that we both thought he was hell for the left.

    If he wins, they're likely going to turn on him later just like they (heh) did Bill Clinton.

    Parent

    Hmmm (none / 0) (#23)
    by AF on Sun Feb 24, 2008 at 11:46:40 PM EST
    I'm not hearing the "heart for Obama" part.  Sounds like you're saying you like him alright but have fundamental disagreements with him that prevent you from voting for him.  That's not really what I was looking for.  

    Parent
    Fair enough (none / 0) (#27)
    by spit on Mon Feb 25, 2008 at 01:22:38 PM EST
    Let me rephrase, shorter: my heart is with building the grassroots, bringing in young voters, and building the state level infrastructure the party needs. He's been very impressive on those counts. It pains me, on that front, not to support him because of those fundamental disagreements.

    Parent
    Very well put -- I share (none / 0) (#21)
    by Cream City on Sun Feb 24, 2008 at 11:34:54 PM EST
    the qualms about his attacks from the right, repeating attacks OF the right in the past on health care . . . and on vouchers, definitely, as I'm in the city that started them and see the devastation done to our public schools. The studies are done, the results are in, and no one ought to be pushing to make this program grow (except the Catholic schools that benefit the most and the scam artists whose storefront schools robbed children of education while robbing taxpayers, too). And ditto re the rest -- and especially the letdown to come for followers; I know young people, new voters, who would be the ones compromised. I hope there is a way to keep them hoping and involved in politics -- that aspect of his campaign has been encouraging to see.

    Parent
    Siegelman (none / 0) (#17)
    by Prabhata on Sun Feb 24, 2008 at 09:51:00 PM EST
    The railroading of Siegelman is a horror story.  It's depressing to know that all the protection under the U.S. Constitution can be ignored when the government wants to go after an individual for political reasons.  It's Amerika.

    *** HOLY MOLY *** (none / 0) (#19)
    by A DC Wonk on Sun Feb 24, 2008 at 10:19:05 PM EST
    Has anybody heard anything more on this!

    HuffPo reports: Parts of "60 Minutes" Broadcast Blocked in Alabama...

    CBS says it was a technical problem out of NY (that only effected citizens in Alabama?!?)

    Anybody know anything more about this?  (I haven't seen it reported anywhere else yet)

    That linked story is a stunner (none / 0) (#22)
    by Cream City on Sun Feb 24, 2008 at 11:42:11 PM EST
    and I hope it gets confirmed by other sources. Now I know that whenever there is a power outage here -- we get a lot of them -- to check what was going to be on tv. Blocking 60 Minutes? What next?

    Parent
    44 State AGs want GOP Investigated (none / 0) (#24)
    by john horse on Mon Feb 25, 2008 at 05:59:36 AM EST
    The 60 Minutes piece on Siegelman was surprisingly good.  Besides the weakness of the evidence against Siegelman, I think it definitely raised questions about whether politics was involved in his prosecution.  

    I can think of nothing more damaging to our democracy than using the power of the state for political purposes.

    That is why 44 state attorney generals have called for Congress to investigate the circumstances behind the prosecution, sentencing and detention of Governor Siegelman.

    The Importance of this story (none / 0) (#25)
    by kenoshaMarge on Mon Feb 25, 2008 at 10:25:54 AM EST
    will be nullified if it gets no further play in the media. CBS probably wouldn't have aired it at all if they hadn't been shamed into it.

    And if the local television stations in Alabama did block only this one segment it makes the story look all the more noteworthy. It also was an important part, as usual, that a Republican  was one of the more outraged and a Republican was the witness to the Rovian criminal behavior. Cause if only Democrats were outraged or witnesses it wouldn't make a difference. Just playing politics, don't ya know!

    No the question would be, what is anyone going to do about it? Hold a hearing? Call a Press conference to express their outrage and then do nothing?

    The Democratic Party basically sat on their hands while one of their own was not only railroaded, but was railroaded into prison. Where were they? Could it possibly be they were the same place they are when major media slimes, smears, attacks and eminently destroys Democratic Candidates? Like AWOL? Or only hiding under the table lest a Republican call them a nasty name.

    We all need to make an effort (none / 0) (#26)
    by BernieO on Mon Feb 25, 2008 at 11:40:07 AM EST
    to keep this story in the news. We should be urging the networks, liberal blogs, our representatives and anyone else we can think of to keep covering the story. Email the CBS link to everyone you know.
    As much as I appreciated that 60 Minutes covered this story I was really angered when, towards the end of the piece, Scott Pelley and Grant Woods, former Republican att'y general of Arizona are talking about how they had never seen anyone charged with a white collar crime manacled. Funny how they managed to forget Susan McDougal.

    Parent
    60 Minutes On Don Siegelman's Alleged Railroading By Rove | 27 comments (27 topical)

    Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment